CHAPTER IV

_Madame Eglentyne_

CHAUCER'S PRIORESS IN REAL LIFE

Ther was also a Nonne, a Prioresse,

That of her smyling was ful simple and coy;

Hir grettest ooth was ne but by sëynt Loy;

And she was cleped madame Eglentyne.

Ful wel she song the service divyne,

Entuned in hir nose ful semely;

And Frensh she spak ful faire and fetisly,

After the scole of Stratford atte Bowe,

For Frensh of Paris was to hir unknowe.

At mete wel y-taught was she with-alle;

She leet no morsel from hir lippes falle,

Ne wette hir fingres in hir sauce depe.

Wel coude she carie a morsel and wel kepe,

That no drope ne fille up-on hir brest.

In curteisye was set ful muche hir lest.

Hir over lippe wyped she so clene,

That in hir coppe was no ferthing sene

Of grece, whan she dronken haddie hir draughte

Ful semely after hir mete she raughte,

And sikerly she was of greet disport,

And ful plesaunt and amiable of port,

And peyned hir to countrefete chere

Of court, and been estatlich of manere,

And to be holden digne of reverence.

But, for to speken of hir conscience,

She was so charitable and so pitous,

She wolde wepe, if that she sawe a mous

Caught in a trap, if it were deed or bledde.

Of smale houndes had she, that she fedde

With rosted flesh, or milk and wastel-breed.

But sore weep she if oon of hem were deed,

Or if men smoot it with a yerde smerte:

And al was conscience and tendre herte

Ful semely hir wimpel pinched was:

Hir nose tretys; her eyen greye as glas;

Hir mouth ful smal, and ther-to softe and reed;

But sikerly she hadde a fair foreheed;

It was almost a spanne brood, I trowe;

For, hardily, she was nat undergrowe.

Ful fetis was hir cloke, as I was war.

Of smal coral aboute hir arm she bar

A peire of bedes, gauded al with grene;

And ther-on heng a broche of gold ful shene,

On which ther was first write a crowned A,

And after, _Amor vincit omnia!_

--GEOFFREY CHAUCER

_Prologue_ to the _Canterbury Tales_

Every one knows Chaucer's description of the Prioress, Madame Eglentyne,

who rode with that very motley and talkative company on the way to

Canterbury. There is no portrait in his gallery which has given rise to

more diverse comment among critics. One interprets it as a cutting

attack on the worldliness of the Church; another thinks that Chaucer

meant to draw a charming and sympathetic picture of womanly gentleness;

one says that it is a caricature, another an ideal; and an American

professor even finds in it a psychological study of thwarted maternal

instinct, apparently because Madame Eglentyne was fond of little dogs

and told a story about a schoolboy. The mere historian may be excused

from following these vagaries. To him Chaucer's Prioress, like Chaucer's

monk and Chaucer's friar, will simply be one more instance of the almost

photographic accuracy of the poet's observation. The rippling

undercurrent of satire is always there; but it is Chaucer's own peculiar

satire--mellow, amused, uncondemning, the most subtle kind of satire,

which does not depend upon exaggeration. The literary critic has only

Chaucer's words and his own heart, or sometimes (low be it spoken) his

own desire to be original, by which to guide his judgement. But the

historian knows; he has all sorts of historical sources in which to

study nunneries, and there he meets Chaucer's Prioress at every turn.

Above all, he has the bishop's registers.

For a long time historians foolishly imagined that kings and wars and

parliaments and the jury system alone were history; they liked

chronicles and Acts of Parliament, and it did not strike them to go and

look in dusty episcopal archives for the big books in which medieval

bishops entered up the letters which they wrote and all the complicated

business of running their dioceses. But when historians did think of

looking there, they found a mine of priceless information about almost

every side of social and ecclesiastical life. They had to dig for it of

course, for almost all that is worth knowing has to be mined like

precious metals out of a rock; and for one nugget the miner often has to

grub for days underground in a mass of dullness; and when he has got it

he has to grub in his own heart, or else he will not understand it. The

historians found fine gold in the bishops' registers, when once they

persuaded themselves that it was not beneath their dignity to grub

there. They found descriptions of vicarages, with all their furniture

and gardens; they found marriage disputes; they found wills full of

entertaining legacies to people dead hundreds of years ago; they found

excommunications; they found indulgences to men for relieving the poor,

repairing roads, and building bridges, long before there was any poor

law, or any county council; they found trials for heresy and witchcraft;

they found accounts of miracles worked at the tombs of saints and even

of some quite unsaintly people, such as Thomas of Lancaster, and Edward

II, and Simon de Montfort; they found lists of travelling expenses when

the bishops rode round their dioceses; in one they even found a minute

account of the personal appearance of Queen Philippa, then a little girl

at her father's Court at Hainault, whom the Bishop of Exeter had been

sent to inspect, in order to see if she were pretty and good enough to

marry Edward III: she was nine years old, and the bishop said that her

second teeth were whiter than her first teeth and that her nose was

broad but not snub, which was reassuring for Edward.[1] Last, but not

least, the historians found a multitude of documents about monasteries,

and among these documents they found visitation records, and among

visitation records they found Chaucer's Prioress, smiling full simple

and coy, fair forehead, well-pinched wimple, necklace, little dogs, and

all, as though she had stepped into a stuffy register by mistake for the

_Canterbury Tales_ and was longing to get out again.

This was the reason that Madame Eglentyne got into the register. In the

Middle Ages all the nunneries of England, and a great many of the

monasteries, used to be visited at intervals by the bishop of their

diocese--or by somebody sent by him--in order to see whether they were

behaving properly. It was rather like the periodical visitation of a

school by one of Her Majesty's inspectors, only what happened was very

different. When Her Majesty's inspector comes he does not sit in state

in the hall, and call all the inmates in front of him one after another,

from the head mistress to the smallest child in the first form, and

invite them to say in what way they think the school is not being

properly run, and what complaints they have to make against their

mistresses and which girl habitually breaks the rules--all breathed

softly and privately into his ear, with no one to overhear them. But

when the bishop came to visit a nunnery, that is precisely what

happened. First of all, he sent a letter to say he was coming, and to

bid the nuns prepare for him. Then he came, with his clerks and a

learned official or two, and was met solemnly by the prioress and all

the nuns, and preached a sermon in their church, and was entertained,

perhaps, to dinner. And then he prepared to examine them, and one by one

they came before him, in order of rank, beginning with the prioress, and

what they had to do was to tell tales about each other. He wanted to

find out if the prioress were ruling well, and if the services were

properly performed, and if the finances were in good order, and if

discipline were maintained; and if any nun had a complaint, then was the

time to make it.

And the nuns were full of complaints. A modern schoolgirl would go pale

with horror over their capacity for tale-bearing. If one nun had boxed

her sister's ears, if another had cut church, if another were too much

given to entertaining friends, if another went out without a licence, if

another had run away with a wandering fluteplayer, the bishop was sure

to hear about it; that is, unless the whole convent were in a disorderly

state, and the nuns had made a compact to wink at each other's

peccadilloes; and not to betray them to the bishop, which occasionally

happened. And if the prioress were at all unpopular he was quite certain

to hear all about her. 'She fares splendidly in her own room and never

invites us,' says one nun; 'She has favourites,' says another, 'and

when she makes corrections she passes lightly over those whom she likes,

and speedily punishes those whom she dislikes'; 'She is a fearful

scold,' says a third; 'She dresses more like a secular person than a

nun, and wears rings and necklaces,' says a fourth; 'She goes

out riding to see her friends far too often,' says a fifth;

'She-is-a-very-bad-business-woman-and-she-has-let-the-house-get-into-

debt-and-the-church-is-falling about-our-ears-and-we-don't-get-enough-

food-and-she-hasn't-given-us-any-clothes-for-two-years-and-she-has-sold-

woods-and farms-without-your-licence-and-she-has-pawned-our-best-set-of

spoons; and no wonder, when she never consults us in any business as she

ought to do.' They go on like that for pages, and the bishop must often

have wanted to put his fingers in his ears and shout to them to stop;

especially as the prioress had probably spent half an hour, for her

part, in telling him how disobedient and ill-tempered, and thoroughly

badly behaved the nuns were.

All these tales the bishop's clerk solemnly wrote down in a big book,

and when the examination was over the bishop summoned all the nuns

together again. And if they had answered 'All is well', as they

sometimes did, or only mentioned trivial faults, he commended them and

went his way; and if they had shown that things really were in a bad

way, he investigated particular charges and scolded the culprits and

ordered them to amend, and when he got back to his palace, or the manor

where he was staying, he wrote out a set of injunctions, based on the

complaints, and saying exactly how things were to be improved; and of

these injunctions one copy was entered in his register and another was

sent by hand to the nuns, who were supposed to read it aloud at

intervals and to obey everything in it. We have in many bishops'

registers these lists of injunctions, copied into them by the bishops'

clerks, and in some, notably in a splendid fifteenth-century Lincoln

register, belonging to the good bishop Alnwick, we have also the

evidence of the nuns, just as it was taken down from their chattering

mouths, and these are the most human and amusing of all medieval

records. It is easy to see what important historical documents

visitation reports are, especially in a diocese like Lincoln, which

possesses an almost unbroken series of registers, ranging over the three

centuries before the Dissolution, so that one can trace the whole

history of some of the nunneries by the successive visitations.

Let us see what light the registers will throw upon Madame Eglentyne,

before Chaucer observed her mounting her horse outside the Tabard Inn.

Doubtless she first came to the nunnery when she was quite a little

girl, because girls counted as grown up when they were fifteen in the

Middle Ages; they could be married out of hand at twelve, and they could

become nuns for ever at fourteen. Probably Eglentyne's father had three

other daughters to marry, each with a dowry, and a gay young spark of a

son, who spent a lot of money on fashionable suits.

Embroidered ... as it were a mede

All ful of fresshe flowers white and rede.

So he thought he had better settle the youngest at once; and he got

together a dowry (it was rarely possible to get into a nunnery without

one, though Church law really forbade anything except voluntary

offerings), and, taking Eglentyne by the hand one summer day, he popped

her into a nunnery a few miles off, which had been founded by his

ancestors. We may even know what it cost him; it was rather a select,

aristocratic house, and he had to pay an entrance fee of £200 in modern

money; and then he had to give Eglentyne her new habit and a bed, and

some other furniture; and he had to make a feast on the day she became a

nun, and invite all the nuns and all his own friends; and he had to tip

the friar, who preached the sermon; and, altogether, it was a great

affair.[2] But the feast would not come at once, because Eglentyne would

have to remain a novice for some years, until she was old enough to take

the vows. So she would stay in the convent and be taught how to sing and

to read, and to talk French of the school of Stratford-atte-Bowe with

the other novices. Perhaps she was the youngest, for girls often did not

enter the convent until they were old enough to decide for themselves

whether they wanted to be nuns; but there were certainly some other

quite tiny novices learning their lessons; and occasionally there would

be a little girl like the one whose sad fate is recorded in a dull

law-book, shut up in a nunnery by a wicked stepfather who wanted her

inheritance (a nun could not inherit land, because she was supposed to

be dead to the world), and told by the nuns that the devil would fly

away with her if she tried to set foot outside the door.[3] However,

Eglentyne had a sunny disposition and liked life in the nunnery, and had

a natural aptitude for the pretty table manners which she learnt there,

as well as for talking French, and though she was not at all prim and

liked the gay clothes and pet dogs which she used to see at home in her

mother's bower, still she had no hesitation at all about taking the veil

when she was fifteen, and indeed she rather liked the fuss that was made

of her, and being called _Madame_ or _Dame_, which was the courtesy

title always given to a nun.

The years passed and Eglentyne's life jogged along peacefully enough

behind the convent walls. The great purpose for which the nunneries

existed, and which most of them fulfilled not unworthily, was the praise

of God. Eglentyne spent a great deal of her time singing and praying in

the convent church, and, as we know,

Ful wel she song the service divyne,

Entuned in hir nose ful semely.

The nuns had seven monastic offices to say every day. About 2 a.m. the

night office was said; they all got out of bed when the bell rang, and

went down in the cold and the dark to the church choir and said Matins,

followed immediately by Lauds. Then they went back to bed, just as the

dawn was breaking in the sky, and slept again for three hours, and then

got up for good at six o'clock and said Prime. After that there followed

Tierce, Sext, None, Vespers, and Compline, spread at intervals through

the day. The last service, compline, was said at 7 p.m. in winter, and

at 8 p.m. in summer, after which the nuns were supposed to go straight

to bed in the dorter, in which connexion one Nun's Rule ordains that

'None shall push up against another wilfully, nor spit upon the stairs

going up and down, but if they tread it out forthwith'![4] They had in

all about eight hours' sleep, broken in the middle by the night service.

They had three meals, a light repast of bread and beer after prime in

the morning, a solid dinner to the accompaniment of reading aloud in the

middle of the day, and a short supper immediately after vespers at 5

or 6 p.m.

From 12 to 5 p.m. in winter and from 1 to 6 p.m. in summer Eglentyne

and her sisters were supposed to devote themselves to manual or brain

work, interspersed with a certain amount of sober and godly recreation.

She would spin, or embroider vestments with the crowned monogram M of

the Blessed Virgin in blue and gold thread, or make little silken purses

for her friends and finely sewn bands for them to bind round their arms

after a bleeding. She would read too, in her psalter or in such saints'

lives as the convent possessed, written in French or English; for her

Latin was weak, though she could construe _Amor vincit omnia_. Perhaps

her convent took in a few little schoolgirls to learn their letters and

good manners with the nuns, and when she grew older she helped to teach

them to read and sing; for though they were happy, they did not receive

a very extensive education from the good sisters. In the summer

Eglentyne was sometimes allowed to work in the convent garden, or even

to go out haymaking with the other nuns; and came back round-eyed to

confide in her confessor that she had seen the cellaress returning

therefrom seated behind the chaplain on his nag,[5] and had thought what

fun it must be to jog behind stout Dan John.

Except for certain periods of relaxation strict silence was supposed to

be observed in the convent for a large part of the day, and if Eglentyne

desired to communicate with her sisters, she was urged to do so by means

of signs. The persons who drew up the lists of signs which were in use

in medieval monastic houses, however, combined a preternatural ingenuity

with an extremely exiguous sense of humour, and the sort of dumb

pandemonium which went on at Eglentyne's dinner table must often have

been more mirth-provoking than speech. The sister who desired fish would

'wag her hands displayed sidelings in manner of a fish tail'; she who

wanted milk would 'draw her left little finger in manner of milking';

for mustard one would 'hold her nose in the upper part of her right fist

and rub it'; another for salt would 'fillip with her right thumb and

forefinger over the left thumb'; another desirous of wine would 'move

her forefinger up and down the end of her thumb afore her eye'; and the

guilty sacristan, struck by the thought that she had not provided

incense for the Mass, would 'put her two fingers into her nostrils'. In

one such table drawn up for nuns there are no less than 106 signs, and

on the whole it is not surprising that the rule of the same nuns enjoins

that 'it is never lawful to use them without some reason and profitable

need, for oft-times more hurt hath an evil word, and more offence it may

be to God'.[6]

The nuns, of course, would not have been human if they had not sometimes

grown a little weary of all these services and this silence; for the

religious life was not, nor was it intended to be, an easy one. It was

not a mere means of escape from work and responsibility. In the early

golden age of monasticism only men and women with a vocation, that is to

say a real genius for monastic life, entered convents. Moreover, when

there they worked very hard with hand and brain, as well as with soul,

and so they got variety of occupation, which is as good as a holiday.

The basis of wise St Benedict's Rule was a nicely adjusted combination

of variety with regularity; for he knew human nature. Thus monks and

nuns did not find the services monotonous, and indeed regarded them as

by far the best part of the day. But in the later Middle Ages, when

Chaucer lived, young people had begun to enter monastic houses rather as

a profession than as a vocation. Many truly spiritual men and women

still took the vows, but with them came others who were little suited to

monastic life, and who lowered its standard, because it was hard and

uncongenial to them. Eglentyne became a nun because her father did not

want the trouble and expense of finding her a husband, and because being

a nun was about the only career for a well-born lady who did not marry.

Moreover, by this time, monks and nuns had grown more lazy, and did

little work with their hands and still less with their heads,

particularly in nunneries, where the early tradition of learning had

died out and where many nuns could hardly understand the Latin in which

their services were written. The result was that monastic life began to

lose that essential variety which St Benedict had designed for it, and

as a result the regularity sometimes became irksome, and the series of

services degenerated into a mere routine of peculiar monotony, which

many of the singers could no longer keep alive with spiritual fervour.

Thus sometimes (it must not be imagined that this happened in all or

even in the majority of houses) the services became empty forms, to be

hurried through with scant devotion and occasionally with scandalous

irreverence. It was the almost inevitable reaction from too

much routine.

Carelessness in the performance of the monastic hours was an exceedingly

common fault during the later Middle Ages, though the monks were always

worse about it than the nuns. Sometimes they 'cut' the services.

Sometimes they behaved with the utmost levity, as at Exeter in 1330,

where the canons giggled and joked and quarrelled during the services

and dropped hot candle wax from the upper stalls on to the shaven heads

of the singers in the stalls below![7] Sometimes they came late to

matins, in the small hours after midnight. This fault was common in

nunneries, for the nuns always would insist on having private drinkings

and gossipings in the evening after compline, instead of going straight

to bed, as the rule demanded--a habit which did not conduce to

wakefulness at 1 a.m. Consequently they were somewhat sleepy at matins

and found an almost Johnsonian difficulty in getting up early. Wise St

Benedict foresaw the difficulty, when he wrote in his rule: 'When they

rise for the Divine Office, let them gently encourage one another,

because of the excuses made by those that are drowsy.'[8] At the nunnery

of Stainfield in 1519 the bishop discovered that half an hour sometimes

elapsed between the last stroke of the bell and the beginning of the

service, and that some of the nuns did not sing, but dozed, partly

because they had not enough candles, but chiefly because they went late

to bed;[9] and whoever is without sin among us, let him cast the first

stone! There was a tendency also among both monks and nuns to slip out

before the end of the service on any good or bad excuse: they had to see

after the dinner or the guest-house, their gardens needed weeding, or

they did not feel well. But the most common fault of all was to gabble

through the services as quickly as they could in order to get them over.

They left out the syllables at the beginning and end of words, they

omitted the dipsalma or pause between two verses, so that one side of

the choir was beginning the second half before the other side had

finished the first; they skipped sentences, they mumbled and slurred

what should have been 'entuned in their nose ful semely', and altogether

they made a terrible mess of the stately plainsong. So prevalent was

the fault of gabbling that the Father of Evil was obliged to charter a

special Devil called Tittivillus, whose sole business it was to collect

all these dropped syllables and carry them back to his master in a big

bag. In one way or another, we have a good deal of information about

him, for he was always letting himself be seen by holy men, who

generally had a sharp eye for devils. One Latin rhyme distinguishes

carefully between the contents of his sack: 'These are they who wickedly

corrupt the holy psalms: the dangler, the gasper, the leaper, the

galloper, the dragger, the mumbler, the fore-skipper, the fore-runner

and the over-leaper: Tittivillus collecteth the fragments of these men's

words.'[10] Indeed, a holy Cistercian abbot once interviewed the poor

little devil himself and heard about his alarming industry; this is the

story as it is told in _The Myroure of Oure Ladye_, written for the

delectation of the nuns of Syon in the fifteenth century: 'We read of a

holy Abbot of the order of Citeaux that while he stood in the choir at

matins he saw a fiend that had a long and great poke hanging about his

neck and went about the choir from one to another and waited busily

after all letters and syllables and words and failings that any made;

and them he gathered diligently and put them in his poke. And when he

came before the Abbot, waiting if aught had escaped him that he might

have gotten and put in his bag, the Abbot was astonied and afeard of the

foulness and misshape of him and said unto him: What art thou? And he

answered and said, I am a poor devil and my name is Tittivillus and I do

mine office that is committed unto me. And what is thine office? said

the Abbot. He answered: I must each day, he said, bring my master a

thousand pokes full of failings and of negligences and syllables and

words, that are done in your order in reading and singing and else I

must be sore beaten.'[11] But there is no reason to suppose that he

often got his beating, though one may be sure that Madame Eglentyne,

busily chanting through her nose, never gave him the slightest help. In

his spare moments, when he was not engaged in picking up those

unconsidered trifles which the monks let fall from the psalms,

Tittivillus used to fill up odd corners of his sack with the idle talk

of people who gossiped in church; and he also sat up aloft and collected

all the high notes of vain tenors, who sang to their own glory, instead

of to the glory of God, and pitched the chants three notes higher than

the cracked voices of their elders could rise.

But the monotony of convent life sometimes did more than make the nuns

unconscious contributors to Tittivillus's sack. It sometimes played

havoc with their tempers. The nuns were not chosen for convent life

because they were saints. They were no more immune from tantrums than

was the Wife of Bath, who was out of all charity when other village

wives went into church before her; and sometimes they got terribly on

each others' nerves. Readers of _Piers Plowman_ will remember that when

the seven deadly sins come in, Wrath tells how he was cook to the

prioress of a convent and, says he,

Of wycked wordes I, Wrath ... here wordes imade,

Til 'thow lixte' and 'thow lixte' ... lopen oute at ones,

And eyther hitte other ... vnder the cheke;

Hadde thei had knyves, by Cryst ... her eyther had killed other.

To be sure, it is not often that we hear of anything so bad as that

fifteenth-century prioress, who used to drag her nuns round the choir by

their veils in the middle of the service, screaming 'Liar!' and

'Harlot!' at them;[12] or that other sixteenth-century lady who used to

kick them and hit them on the head with her fists and put them in the

stocks.[13] All prioresses were not 'ful plesaunt and amiable of port',

or stately in their manner. The records of monastic visitations show

that bad temper and petty bickering sometimes broke the peace of

convent life.

But we must be back at Eglentyne. She went on living for ten or twelve

years as a simple nun, and she sang the services very nicely and had a

sweet temper and pretty manners and was very popular. Moreover, she was

of good birth; Chaucer tells us a great deal about her beautiful

behaviour at table and her courtesy, which shows that she was a lady

born and bred; indeed, his description of this might have been taken

straight out of one of the feudal books of deportment for girls; even

her personal beauty--straight nose, grey eyes, and little red

mouth--conforms to the courtly standard. The convents were apt to be

rather snobbish; ladies and rich burgesses' daughters got into them, but

poor and low-born girls never. So the nuns probably said to each other

that what with her pretty ways and her good temper and her aristocratic

connexions, wouldn't it be a good thing to choose her for prioress when

the old prioress died? And so they did, and she had been a prioress for

some years when Chaucer met her. At first it was very exciting, and

Eglentyne liked being called 'Mother' by nuns who were older than

herself, and having a private room to sit in and all the visitors to

entertain. But she soon found that it was not by any means all a bed of

roses; for there was a great deal of business to be done by the head of

a house--not only looking after the internal discipline of the convent,

but also superintending money matters and giving orders to the bailiffs

on her estates, and seeing that the farms were paying well, and the

tithes coming in to the churches which belonged to the nunnery, and that

the Italian merchants who came to buy the wool off her sheeps' backs

gave a good price for it. In all this business she was supposed to take

the advice of the nuns, meeting in the chapter-house, where all business

was transacted. I am afraid that sometimes Eglentyne used to think that

it was much better to do things by herself, and so she would seal

documents with the convent seal without telling them. One should always

distrust the head of an office or school or society who says, with a

self-satisfied air, that it is much more satisfactory to do the thing

herself than to depute it to the proper subordinates; it either means

that she is an autocrat, or else that she cannot organize. Madame

Eglentyne was rather an autocrat, in a good-natured sort of way, and

besides she hated bother. So she did not always consult the nuns; and I

fear too (after many researches into that past of hers which Chaucer

forgot to mention) that she often tried to evade rendering an account of

income and expenditure to them every year, as she was supposed to do.

The nuns, of course, objected to this; and the first time the bishop

came on his rounds they complained about it to him. They said, too, that

she was a bad business woman and got into debt; and that when she was

short of money she used to sell woods belonging to the convent, and

promise annual pensions to various people in return for lump sums down,

and lease out farms for a long time at low rates, and do various other

things by which the convent would lose in the long run. And besides,

she had let the roof of the church get into such ill repair that rain

came through the holes on to their heads when they were singing; and

would my lord bishop please to look at the holes in their clothes and

tell her to provide them with new ones? Other wicked prioresses used

sometimes even to pawn the plate and jewels of the convent, to get money

for their own private purposes. But Eglentyne was not at all wicked or

dishonest, though she was a bad manager; the fact was that she had no

head for figures. I am _sure_ that she had no head for figures; you have

only got to read Chaucer's description of her to know that she was not a

mathematician. Besides the nuns were exaggerating: their clothes were

not in holes, only just a little threadbare. Madame Eglentyne was far

too fastidious to allow ragged clothes about her; and as to the roof of

the church, she had meant to save enough money to have some tiles put on

to it, but it really _was_ very hard to make two ends meet in a medieval

nunnery, especially if (as I repeat) you had no head for figures.

Probably the bishop saw how the land lay, so he ordered her never to do

anything without consulting the convent, and he shut up the common seal

in a box with three different sorts of locks, to which Madame Eglentyne

and two of the senior nuns had the keys, so that she could not open it

alone and so could not seal any business agreement without their

consent. And he ordered her to keep accounts and present them every year

(there are bundles of her accounts still preserved in the Record

Office). Finally he deputed a neighbouring rector to act as custodian of

the business affairs of the house so that she should always have his

help. Things went better after that.

Eglentyne, it seems, was never really interested in business, and was

quite pleased to have her time taken up with looking after internal

affairs and entertaining visitors, with an occasional jaunt outside to

see how the estates were getting on. And she began to find that she

could lead a much freer and gayer life now that she was a prioress; for

the prioress of a convent had rooms of her own, instead of sharing the

common dormitory and refectory; sometimes she even had a sort of little

house with a private kitchen. The abbess of one great nunnery at

Winchester in the sixteenth century had her own staff to look after her,

a cook, and an under cook, and a housemaid and a gentlewoman to wait

upon her, like any great lady in the world, and never dined with the

nuns except on state occasions. But a superior generally had with her

one nun to act as her companion and assist her in the choir and be a

witness to her good behaviour; this nun was called her chaplain, and was

supposed to be changed every year, to prevent favouritism. It will be

remembered that when Madame Eglentyne went on her pilgrimage she took

her nun chaplain with her, as well as three priests; that was because no

nun was ever allowed to go out alone. One of Madame Eglentyne's duties

as prioress was to entertain visitors with her celebrated cheer of

court, and we may be sure that she had a great many. Her sisters, who

were now grand ladies with husbands and manors of their own, and her old

father, and all the great people of the county came to congratulate her;

and after that they used often to drop in for a dinner of chickens and

wine and wastel bread if they passed the house on a journey, and

sometimes they spent the night there. One or two ladies, whose husbands

were away at the wars or on a pilgrimage to Rome, even came as paying

guests to the convent and lived there for a whole year, for nothing

pleased the country gentlemen or wealthy burgesses better than to use

nunneries as boarding-houses for their women-kind.

All this was very disturbing to the peace and quiet of the nuns, and

especially disturbing were the boarders, for they wore gay clothes, and

had pet dogs and callers, and set a very frivolous example to the nuns.

At one nunnery we find a bishop ordering: 'Let Felmersham's wife, with

her whole household and other women, be utterly removed from your

monastery within one year, seeing that they are a cause of disturbance

to the nuns and an occasion to bad example, by reason of their attire

and of those who come to visit them.'[14] It can be easily imagined

_why_ the bishops objected so much to the reception of these worldly

married women as boarders. Just substitute for 'Felmersham's wife' 'the

Wife of Bath' and all is explained. That lady was not a person whom a

prioress would lightly refuse; the list of her pilgrimages alone would

give her the _entrée_ into any nunnery. Smiling her gap-toothed smile

and riding easily upon her ambler, she would enter the gates, and what a

month of excitement would pass before she rode away again. I am sure

that it was she who taught Madame Eglentyne the most fashionable way to

pinch a wimple; and she certainly introduced hats 'as broad as is a

buckler or a targe' and scarlet stockings into some nunneries. The

bishops disliked it all very much, but they never succeeded in turning

the boarders out for all their efforts, because the nuns always needed

the money which they paid for their board and lodging.

It is easy to understand that this constant intercourse with worldly

visitors would give rise to the spread of worldly habits in Madame

Eglentyne's nunnery. Nuns, after all, were but women, and they had the

amiable vanities of their sex. But Authority (with a large A) did not

consider their vanities amiable at all. It was the view of Authority

that the Devil had dispatched three lesser D's to be the damnation of

nuns, and those three D's were Dances, Dresses, and Dogs. Medieval

England was famous for dancing and mumming and minstrelsy; it was Merry

England because, however plague and pestilence and famine and the

cruelties of man to man might darken life, still it loved these things.

But there were no two views possible about what the Church thought of

dancing; it was accurately summed up by one moralist in the aphorism,

'The Devil is the inventor and governor and disposer of dances and

dancing.' Yet when we look into those accounts which Madame Eglentyne

rendered (or did not render) to her nuns at the end of every year, we

shall find payments for wassail at New Year and Twelfth Night, for May

games, for bread and ale on bonfire nights, for harpers and players at

Christmas, for a present to the Boy Bishop on his rounds, and perhaps

for an extra pittance when the youngest schoolgirl was allowed to dress

up and act as abbess of the convent for the whole of Innocents' Day. And

when we look in the bishops' registers we shall find Madame Eglentyne

forbidden 'all manner of minstrelsy, interludes, dancing or revelling

within your holy place'; and she would be fortunate indeed if her bishop

would make exception for Christmas, 'and other honest times of

recreation among yourselves used in absence of seculars in all wise'.

Somehow one feels an insistent conviction that her cheer of court

included dancing.[15]

Then, again, there were the fashionable dresses which the visitors

introduced into nunneries. It is quite certain that Madame Eglentyne

was not unmoved by them; and it is a sad fact that she began to think

the monastic habit very black and ugly, and the monastic life very

strict; and to decide that if some little amenities were imported into

it no one would be a penny the worse, and perhaps the bishop would not

notice. That is why, when Chaucer met her,

Ful fetis was hir cloke, as I was war,

Of smal coral aboute hir arm she bar

A peire of bedes, gauded al with grene,

And ther-on heng a broche of gold ful shene.

Unfortunately, however, the bishop did notice; the registers are indeed

full of those clothes of Madame Eglentyne's, and of the even more

frivolous ones which she wore in the privacy of the house. For more than

six weary centuries the bishops waged a holy war against fashion in the

cloister, and waged it in vain; for as long as nuns mingled freely with

secular women, it was impossible to prevent them from adopting secular

modes. Occasionally a wretched bishop would find himself floundering

unhandily, in masculine bewilderment, through something like a complete

catalogue of contemporary fashions, in order to specify what the nuns

were _not_ to wear. Synods sat solemnly, bishops and archbishops shook

their grey heads, over golden hairpins and silver belts, jewelled rings,

laced shoes, slashed tunics, low necks and long trains, gay colours,

costly cloth, and valuable furs. The nuns were supposed to wear their

veils pinned tightly down to their eyebrows, so that their foreheads

were completely hidden; but high foreheads happened to be fashionable

among worldly ladies, who even shaved theirs to make them higher, and

the result was that the nuns could not resist lifting up and spreading

out their veils, for how otherwise did Chaucer _know_ that Madame

Eglentyne had such a fair forehead ('almost a spanne broad, I trowe')?

If she had been wearing her veil properly, it would have been invisible,

and the father of English poetry may be observed discreetly but plainly

winking the other eye when he puts in that little touch; his

contemporaries would see the point very quickly. And that brooch and

that fetis cloak of hers.... Here is what some tale-bearing nuns told

the Bishop of Lincoln about their Prioress, fifty years after Chaucer

wrote the _Canterbury Tales_. 'The Prioress,' they said with their most

sanctimonious air, wears golden rings exceeding costly, with divers

precious stones and also girdles silvered and gilded over and silken

veils and she carries her veil too high above her forehead, so that her

forehead, being entirely uncovered, can be seen of all, and she wears

furs of vair. Also she wears shifts of cloth of Rennes, which costs

sixteen pence the ell. Also she wears kirtles laced with silk and tiring

pins of silver and silver gilt and has made all the nuns wear the like.

Also she wears above her veil a cap of estate, furred with budge. Item,

she has on her neck a long silken band, in English a lace, which hangs

down below her breast and there on a golden ring with one diamond.[16]

Is it not Madame Eglentyne to the life? Nothing escaped our good Dan

Chaucer's eye, for all that he rode always looking on the ground.

Moreover, it was not only in her dress that the Prioress and her sister

nuns aped the fashions of the world. Great ladies of the day loved to

amuse themselves with pet animals; and nuns were quick to follow their

example. So,

Of smale houndes had she, that she fedde

With rosted flesh, or milk and wastel-breed.

But sore weep she if oon of hem were deed,

Or if men smoot it with a yerde smerte.

The visitation reports are full of those little dogs and other animals;

and how many readers of the Prologue know that the smale houndes, like

the fair forehead and the brooch of gold full sheen, were strictly

against the rules? For the bishops regarded pets as bad for discipline,

and century after century they tried to turn the animals out of the

convents, without the slightest success. The nuns just waited till the

bishop had gone and then whistled their dogs back again. Dogs were

easily the favourite pets, though monkeys, squirrels, rabbits, birds and

(very rarely) cats were also kept. One archbishop had to forbid an

abbess whom he visited to keep _monkeys and a number of dogs_ in her own

chamber and charged her at the same time with stinting her nuns in food;

one can guess what became of the roasted flesh or milk and wastel-breed!

It was a common medieval practice to bring animals into church, where

ladies often attended service with dog in lap and men with hawk on

wrist; just as the highland farmer brings his collie with him today.

This happened in the nunneries too. Sometimes it was the lay-boarders in

the convents who brought their pets with them; there is a pathetic

complaint by the nuns of one house 'that Lady Audley, who boards there,

has a great abundance of dogs, insomuch that whenever she comes to

church there follow her twelve dogs, who make a great uproar in church,

hindering the nuns in their psalmody and the nuns thereby are

terrified!'[17] But often enough the nuns themselves transgressed.

Injunctions against bringing pet dogs into choir occur in several

visitation reports, the most amusing instance being contained in those

sent to Romsey Abbey by William of Wykeham in 1387, just about the same

year that Chaucer was writing the _Canterbury Tales_: 'Item,' runs the

injunction, 'whereas we have convinced ourselves by clear proofs that

some of the nuns of your house bring with them to church birds, rabbits,

hounds and such like frivolous things, whereunto they give more heed

than to the offices of the church, with frequent hindrance to their own

psalmody and to that of their fellow nuns and to the grievous peril of

their souls--therefore we strictly forbid you all and several, in virtue

of the obedience due to us that ye presume henceforward to bring to

church no birds, hounds, rabbits or other frivolous things that promote

indiscipline.... Item, whereas through hunting dogs and other hounds

abiding within your monastic precincts, the alms that should be given

to the poor are devoured and the church and cloister ... are foully

defiled ... and whereas, through their inordinate noise divine service

is frequently troubled--therefore we strictly command and enjoin you,

Lady Abbess, that you remove the dogs altogether and that you suffer

them never henceforth, nor any other such hounds, to abide within the

precincts of your nunnery.'[18] But it was useless for any bishop to

order Madame Eglentyne to give up her dogs, she could not even be parted

from them on a pilgrimage, though they must have been a great nuisance

in the inns, especially as she was so fussy about their food.

For Chaucer's prioress, we must admit, was rather a worldly lady, though

her pretty clothes and little dogs were harmless enough on modern

standards and one's sympathies are all against the bishops. She

probably became more worldly as time went on, because she had so many

opportunities for social intercourse. Not only had she to entertain

visitors in the convent, but often the business of the house took her

away upon journeys and these offered many opportunities for hobnobbing

with her neighbours. Sometimes she had to go to London to see after a

law-suit and that was a great excursion with another nun, or perhaps

two, and a priest and several yeomen to look after her. Sometimes she

had to go and see the bishop, to get permission to take in some little

schoolgirls. Sometimes she went to the funeral of a great man, whom her

father knew and who left her twenty shillings and a silver cup in his

will. Sometimes she went to the wedding of one of her sisters, or to be

godmother to their babies; though the bishops did not like these worldly

ties, or the dances and merry-makings which accompanied weddings and

christenings. Indeed her nuns occasionally complained about her journeys

and said that though she pretended it was all on the business of the

house, they had their doubts; and would the bishop please just look into

it. At one nunnery we find the nuns complaining that their house is £20

in debt 'and this principally owing to the costly expenses of the

prioress, because she frequently rides abroad and pretends that she does

so on the common business of the house although it is not so, with a

train of attendants much too large and tarries too long abroad and she

feasts sumptuously, both when abroad and at home and she is very choice

in her dress, so that the fur trimmings of her mantle are worth

100s'![19]

As a matter of fact there was nothing of which the church disapproved

more than this habit, shared by monks and nuns, of wandering about

outside their cloisters; moralists considered that intercourse with the

world was at the root of all the evil which crept into the monastic

system. The orthodox saying was that a monk out of his cloister was like

a fish out of water; and it will be remembered that Chaucer's monk

thought the text not worth an oyster. Indeed most of the monks managed

to swim very well in the air, and the nuns too persisted in taking every

sort of excuse for wandering in the world. Right through the Middle Ages

council after council, bishop after bishop, reformer after reformer,

tried in vain to keep them shut up. The greatest attempt of all began

in 1300, when the pope published a Bull ordering that nuns should

never, save in very exceptional circumstances, leave their convents and

that no secular person should be allowed to go in and visit them,

without a special licence and a good reason. This will make the modern

reader pity the poor nuns, but there is no need, for nobody ever

succeeded in putting it into force for more than five minutes, though

the bishops spent over two centuries in trying to do so and were still

trying in vain when King Henry VIII dissolved the nunneries and turned

all the nuns out into the world for ever, whether they liked it or not.

At one nunnery in the Lincoln diocese, when the bishop came and

deposited a copy of the Bull in the house and ordered the nuns to obey

it, they ran after him to the gate when he was riding away and threw the

Bull at his head, screaming that they would never observe it.[20] The

more practical bishops indeed, soon stopped trying to enforce the Bull

as it stood and contented themselves with ordering that nuns were not to

go out or pay visits too often, or without a companion, or without

licence, or without a good reason. But even in this they were not very

successful, because the nuns were most prolific in excellent reasons why

they should go out. Sometimes they said that their parents were ill; and

then they would go away to smooth the pillow of the sick. Sometimes they

said that they had to go to market to buy herrings. Sometimes they said

that they had to go to confession at a monastery. Sometimes it is really

difficult to imagine _what_ they said. What are we to think, for

instance, of that giddy nun 'who on Monday night did pass the night with

the Austin friars at Northampton and did dance and play the lute with

them in the same place until midnight, and on the night following she

passed the night with the Friars' preachers at Northampton, luting and

dancing in like manner'?[21] Chaucer told us how the friar loved harping

and how his eyes twinkled like stars in his head when he sang, but

failed perhaps to observe that he had lured Madame Eglentyne into

a dance.

It is indeed difficult to see what 'legitimate' excuses the nuns can

have made for all their wandering about in the streets and the fields

and in and out of people's houses, and it is sorely to be feared that

either they were too much of a handful for Madame Eglentyne, or else she

winked at their doings. For somehow or other one suspects that she had

no great opinion of bishops. After all Chaucer would never have met her,

if she had not managed to circumvent her own, since if there was one

excuse for wandering of which the bishops thoroughly disapproved, it was

precisely the excuse of pilgrimages. Madame Eglentyne was not quite as

simple and coy as she looked. How many of the literary critics, who

chuckle over her, know that she never ought to have got into the

Prologue at all? The Church was quite clear in its mind that pilgrimages

for nuns were to be discouraged. As early as 791 a council had forbidden

the practice and in 1195 another at York decreed, 'In order that the

opportunity of wandering may be taken from nuns we forbid them to take

the path of pilgrimage.' In 1318 an archbishop of York strictly forbade

the nuns of one convent to leave their house 'by reason of any vow of

pilgrimage which they might have taken. If any had taken such vows she

was to say as many psalters as it would have taken days to perform the

pilgrimage so rashly vowed.'[22] One has a melancholy vision of poor

Madame Eglentyne saying psalters interminably through her tretys nose,

instead of jogging along so gaily with her motley companions and telling

so prettily her tale of little St Hugh. Such prohibitions might be

multiplied from medieval records; and indeed it is unnecessary to go

further than Chaucer to understand why it was that bishops offered such

strenuous opposition to pilgrimages for nuns; one has only to remember

some of the folk, in whose company the prioress travelled and some of

the tales they told. If one could only be certain, for instance, that

she rode all the time with her nun and her priests, or at least between

the Knight and the poor Parson of a town! But there were also the Miller

and the Summoner and (worst of all) that cheerful and engaging sinner,

the Wife of Bath. It is really quite disturbing to think what additional

details the Wife of Bath may have given the prioress about her

five husbands.

This then was Chaucer's prioress in real life, for the poet who drew her

was one of the most wonderful observers in the whole of English

literature. We may wade through hundreds of visitation reports and

injunctions and everywhere the grey eyes of his prioress will twinkle at

us out of their pages, and in the end we must always go to Chaucer for

her picture, to sum up everything that historical records have taught

us. As the bishop found her, so he saw her, aristocratic,

tender-hearted, worldly, taking pains to 'countrefete there of court';

liking pretty clothes and little dogs; a lady of importance, attended by

a nun and three priests; spoken to with respect by the none too

mealy-mouthed host--no 'by Corpus Dominus' or 'cokkes bones' or 'tel on

a devel wey' for her, but 'cometh neer, my lady prioress,' and

My lady Prioresse, by your leve

If that I wiste I sholde yow nat greve,

I wolde demen that ye tellen sholde

A tale next, if so were that ye wolde.

Now wol ye vouche-sauf, my lady dere?

He talks to no one else like that, save perhaps to the knight. Was she

religious? Perhaps; but save for her singing the divine service and for

her lovely address to the Virgin, at the beginning of her tale, Chaucer

can find but little to say on the point;

But for speken of hir conscience (he says)

She was so charitable and so pitous,

and then, as we are waiting to hear of her almsgiving to the poor--that

she would weep over a mouse in a trap, or a beaten puppy, says Chaucer.

A good ruler of her house? again, doubtless. But when Chaucer met her

the house was ruling itself somewhere at the 'shire's ende'. The world

was full of fish out of water in the fourteenth century, and, by sëynt

Loy, said Madame Eglentyne, swearing her greatest oath, like Chaucer's

monk, she held that famous text not worth an oyster. So we take our

leave of her, characteristically on the road to Canterbury.

Medieval People · 第 4 / 8 章